Report 2017 ADVISORY COMMITTEE on the ASSESSMENT of RESTITUTION APPLICATIONS for ITEMS of CULTURAL VALUE and the SECOND WORLD WAR
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
ADVISORY COMMITTEE ON THE ASSESSMENT OF RESTITUTION APPLICATIONS FOR ITEMS OF CULTURAL VALUE AND THE SECOND WORLD WAR Report 2017 ADVISORY COMMITTEE ON THE ASSESSMENT OF RESTITUTION APPLICATIONS FOR ITEMS OF CULTURAL VALUE AND THE SECOND WORLD WAR Report 2017 Visiting address: Lange Voorhout 13 Postal address: P.O. Box 556 2501 CN The Hague, The Netherlands Telephone: +31 (0)70 376 5992 E-mail: [email protected] Internet: www.restitutiecommissie.nl/en Cover illustration: View of the Abbey of Grottaferrata by Caspar van Wittel (Recommendation regarding Berolzheimer, RC 1.166) Table of Contents FOREWORD 5 1. INTRODUCTION 7 2. DUTCH RESTITUTION POLICY 8 2.1 History in Brief 8 2.2 Restitutions Committee’s Tasks 9 2.3 Current Restitution Policy 9 2.4 Status of the Announced Changes in Implementation 10 of the Restitution Policy 2.5 Change in Criteria for Assessing Requests for Revised Advice 10 3. A LOOK BACK AT 2017 11 3.1 Composition of the Restitutions Committee 11 3.2 Restitutions Committee Employees 12 3.3 Activities in 2017 12 3.4 Developments in Advisory Activities 12 3.5 Symposiums, Presentations and Study Days 13 3.6 Meeting of European Committees and Conference in London 14 4. OVERVIEW OF RESTITUTIONS COMMITTEE 15 RECOMMENDATIONS AND OPINIONS 4.1 Overview from 2002 to 2017 15 4.2 Dutch National Art Collection Cases 15 4.3 Cases Concerning Works not in the Dutch National Art Collection 16 4.4 Status as at End of 2017 17 5. RECOMMENDATIONS ISSUED IN 2017 18 APPENDICES 53 3 Foreword The 2016 annual report contains the last foreword by my predecessor Willibrord Davids. He served as the Committee’s chair for eight years in an inspired fashion, often in difficult circumstances, and I want to take this opportunity to once again thank him wholeheartedly for his contribution. It goes without saying that my gratitude also extends to Committee members Dick Herrmann and Evert van Straaten, who also stood down on 23 December 2016. Gerdien Verschoor, Jaap Koster and I completed our first year on the Committee with the four sitting members in an atmosphere of cooperation. In accordance with the policy established by the Minister of OCW (Education, Culture and Science), two further members with many years of service, Jan Bank (member since 2001) and 1. Chair Dr A. Hammerstein Peter van Os (member since 2004), stepped down as of 23 December 2017. Both of them used their extensive knowledge and experience to make a significant contribution to the Committee’s work. This requires the ability to form a balanced and thoughtful view in circumstances that are always trying. They were ideally suited for this role. The departure of Inge van der Vlies, who joined the Committee in 2004, represented the loss of a Vice-Chair whose specific knowledge made a major contribution to the way the Committee has performed. On behalf of everyone involved I want to express my sincere appreciation for their loyalty to the Committee and their fellowship. Disclaimer Two new members were appointed at the end of December. The Committee welcomes This English version is a translation of the original Dutch report ‘Verslag 2017’, Dr Claartje Wesselink and Dr Jan van Kreveld as very competent replacements for in case of possible differences in translation we refer you to the Dutch report. members who have stepped down. Finally, the member with the longest service on the Committee, Heikelien Verrijn Stuart, was appointed Vice-Chair. With effect from 1 January 2017 Marijn Kooij has been the Committee’s Secretary, filling the vacancy left by Robbert Nachbahr. Annemarie Marck terminated her highly appreciated work for the Committee at the end of 2017. Frequently used abbreviations: The transition that has marked 2017 arose from the letter of 4 October 2016 from the 1 BHG Origins Unknown Agency Minister of OCW to the Lower House. In it the Minister announced that she wanted NK collection Netherlands Art Property Collection there to be an expertise centre in which the Committee’s researchers would have places. OCW Education, Culture and Science One of the objectives in this regard was to assure the continuity of the knowledge of and RCE Cultural Heritage Agency RKD Netherlands Institute for Art History SNK Netherlands Art Property Foundation 1 See Report 2016, appendix 5. 4 5 1. Introduction research into items of cultural value and looted art in a location where they could also Since 2002 the Advisory Committee on the Assessment of Restitution Applications be deployed in a broader context. This transition has been severely delayed as a result of for Items of Cultural Value and the Second World War (hereinafter referred to as the various factors, which I regret and do not address in detail here. These factors have been Restitutions Committee or the Committee) has been issuing advice about claims to items a major source of difficulties for the Committee’s employees over the last year and have of cultural value whose owners were involuntarily dispossessed of them between 1933 and also cost a very great deal of time. The prospects are now favourable because substantial 1945 as a consequence of the Nazi regime. strides towards agreement have been made with the NIOD Institute for War, Holocaust and Genocide Studies, which has adopted a very positive attitude, and space has been The Restitutions Committee was established by the State Secretary for Education, found in the National Archives of the Netherlands. This means that the independence of Culture and Science (OCW) by a decree of 16 November 2001. It comprises lawyers, the Committee and the investigations has been assured. a historian and an art historian.2 The Committee’s members and employees do their work independently of the Ministry of OCW. I am very satisfied with the cooperation in the Committee and the collaboration with all the Committee’s supporters. Although the number of decisions has remained modest, the The subject of this sixteenth annual report is the work of the Restitutions Committee thickness of the files shows that much work has been done. The number of cases being and its employees in 2017. handled averaged about eighteen. During the year under review the Committee was able to issue seven recommendations. Analysis of these recommendations reveals that this year Chapter 2 contains a description of the Restitutions Committee’s history, followed by there was a balance between rejection and granting. In three cases the Committee advised a review of its remit, current Dutch restitution policy, and the status of this policy’s granting the restitution application. In the other cases, including one request for revised implementation. The chapter ends with a description of the change in the assessment advice, the Committee advised rejection. Finally, the Committee’s advice with regard to criteria for requests for renewed advice. Chapter 3 addresses the year under review one application was to partially grant it and to restitute some of the paintings. One of the and includes an introduction to the Committee’s members and employees as well as other recommendations to restitute, the advice in the case of Krasicki (RC 1.152) of a description of the activities carried out. A few of the recommendations made by the 20 February 2017, contains a new aspect because it concerned a loss of possession Committee are also discussed in detail. A quantitative overview of the opinions and sustained by a non-Jewish owner in Poland. recommendations issued from 2002 to 2017 is presented in chapter 4. Finally, in chapter 5 there is the text, with personal data removed, of all the opinions and recommendations During the last year the Committee has reviewed the criteria it uses for assessing that the Committee issued in 2017. requests for revised advice. The Committee decided, in line with the Minister’s letter of 4 October 2016 to the Lower House, that only new facts can give rise to advising the Minister to reconsider a previously rejected restitution application. This means that the criterion of procedural errors used previously by the Committee will no longer be applied. Finally, it can be pointed out that the subject of looted art remains in the spotlight. The degree of attention in the media demonstrates the ongoing need for solutions in this problem area. The international element came very much to the fore through the meeting organized by the British Spoliation Advisory Panel in London on 11 September, when restitution committees from the United Kingdom, Germany, France, Austria and the Netherlands met officially for the first time since the conference organized by the Dutch Restitutions Committee in 2012. In the year ahead the Committee will strive to give further substance to closer international cooperation and continuation of the contacts with those involved. 2 Decree Establishing the Advisory Committee on the Assessment of Restitution Applications for Items of Fred Hammerstein Cultural Value and the Second World War, 16 November 2001. The Decree Establishing the Restitutions Committee was amended by the State Secretary for OCW by a decree of 4 July 2012. Appendix 1 contains Chair the 2001 Decree Establishing the Restitutions Committee and the associated explanatory notes. The entire amended text of the Decree Establishing the Restitutions Committee, which came into effect on 19 July 2012, can be found in Appendix 2. See section 2.4 of Report 2012 for more information about the amendment of the Decree Establishing the Restitutions Committee. 6 7 2. Dutch Restitution Policy 2.2 Restitutions Committee’s Tasks The Restitutions Committee’s primary task is to issue advice to the Minister of OCW 2.1 History in Brief about claims to items of cultural value in the Dutch National Art Collection, in other words the collections in the possession of the Dutch State.5 Not all the items of cultural Between 1933 and 1945 the Nazis seized, stole or purchased artworks, antiques, jewellery value whose possession was lost by the former owner as a consequence of the Nazi regime and other objects from private individuals and art galleries on a large scale throughout ended up in the Dutch National Art Collection.